Editorial: Can farm bill pass without food stamps?

Unable to pass the farm bill any other way, the U.S. House of Representatives last week removed the food stamps program from the legislation to gain approval by a margin of only eight votes.

Removing food stamps from the farm bill has the potential to damage the nutrition program. It also has the potential to give it a better chance of survival by liberating it from an increasingly controversial piece of legislation.

We believe those two unrelated elements that have for decades been part of the farm bill should be separated from one another but not at the cost of harming either.

The fear that one or the other might suffer is probably what has motivated such philosophically diverse groups as the Congressional Black Caucus and 500 farm organizations to oppose divorcing the two from each other.

Senate Agriculture Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., said on Bloomberg TV she thought it would be "a serious mistake" to dismantle the coalition of rural and urban states that work together on what she called "food security."

Since 1973, farm subsidies and the food stamps program, now known as the Supplemental Nutrition Program, or SNAP, have enjoyed a symbiotic relationship. The nutrition program, which accounts for about 80 percent of the farm bill's spending, has helped garner votes from urban states to support farm subsidies.

But last month, the two parts of the bill worked against each other. House Republicans proposed cutting $20 billion from the food stamps program, which more conservative Republicans thought was too little and Democrats thought was too much.

The bill, which must be renewed every five years, failed to pass. The provisions of the previous farm bill were extended but are set to expire Sept. 30.

Critics say the farm bill should be eliminated, ending subsidies that insulate farmers from financial ruin because of crop failures resulting from drought, insects or other disasters. But this country can ill-afford to risk the failure of an industry that feeds the nation.

Nor can it allow more than 47 million Americans who depend on food stamps afford to have that program slashed, as many fear may happen.

Some experts say the program will continue regardless of any changes. According to an article in USA Today, because of the way it was structured, SNAP will be funded through appropriations bills, even if it is severed from farm legislation. Others fear that if the program is not formally reauthorized, some Republicans may seize on the opportunity to make draconian cuts.

But the separation may not be permanent. The Senate earlier this month passed a bill of its own that retained SNAP as part of the farm bill, with a small cut in funding.

In addition, President Barack Obama has reportedly threatened to veto farm legislation that excludes food stamps.

Now, it will ultimately be up to Congress as a whole to hammer out a final version of the farm bill on which both chambers can agree - and that likely will be a hybrid of the Senate and House bills.

We believe it would be a commonsense move to permanently sever the bond between the two disparate parts of the farm bill. But Congress must take care not to harm the SNAP program by significantly reducing it during a time when so many Americans, 47 percent of whom are children, need food stamps just to survive.

This legislation has languished long enough. Congress should act quickly to pass a farm bill that strengthens the position of the nation's food producers and to protect the SNAP program and the millions who depend upon it.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Email this article

Editorial: Can farm bill pass without food stamps?

Unable to pass the farm bill any other way, the U.S. House of Representatives last week removed the food stamps program from the legislation to gain approval by a margin of only eight votes.